I know these questions are OK when you look at the tag, but I think this and this question should have "in NetHack" at the end of the title.
Do you agree or is it just me that is picky?
As an example of a vague title, please take a look at the title of this (now deleted) question:
How can I kill the president?
Is it vague? Yes. Does it catch the eye as a result? Also yes, and this is a good thing as Ivo colorfully points out. The fact that it's particularly vague is not really any different than this question that also doesn't list the game name.
On SO, people see a question tagged [c#], it should be a reasonable understanding that the question is about C#. You don't need to preface your title with "C#: " or end it with "in C#", and in many cases this gets edited out.
I wouldn't suggest requiring game names to be in titles for the same reason I wouldn't suggest requiring the platform to be in the title. That's why we have tags, so that we can use the question body and title to cover the other elements of the question. And moreso for the title, you are limited to basically a sentence to catch people's eyes. Piquing interest and curiosity is a good thing, especially in a naturally curious community like Gaming.
In response to your new example, if you feel a particular question is offensively inclined due to its title, flag it. Downvote if you feel it is dangerous, and consider leaving a comment explaining what should be changed. But vagueness is not identical to offensiveness, and vagueness isn't a problem as long as the title still succeeds at its primary goal: concisely defining the problem. And its secondary goal is to attract people who will view and possibly answer the question. If you are worried about negative implications, you can add the qualifiers like game name to your own questions. But vagueness is fine.
If you're worried about these things being upvote bait, then to be honest that's not easy to monitor or control. Remember that an attractive title makes people look at the question, so a really good question with a really good title will get more votes than a really good question with a less attractive title because there will be more people to vote on it. There's no way to tell how many votes come just because the title is catch versus the content, but you can tell from the fact that the answers to good questions also receive a large number of votes. We will obviously notice trends if any specific users try to be abusive about their titles, and appropriate measures will be taken.
While I understand people who say that question titles shouldn't contain the name of the game since it can be deduced from the tags, I think there's a problem that's being overlooked here.
When the site grows sufficiently, it will hopefully contain a great deal of questions. Let us look at a question like "Which vendor sells the cheapest health potions?", which could be a valid question in a myriad of games. Let's say I want to ask this question for game X, and so I write a new question with this title, intending to tag it with X later on. I am then immediately bombarded with suggestions of related questions, all of which have a nearly identical title. Since there's no way of seeing the related questions' tags (unless I've missed something) I will be forced to open each and every question to look at the tags. Alternatively (and more cleverly, though this might not occur to everyone at first) I will be forced to perform a search, but I might fear that I have still managed to miss the question which is identical to mine.
A question title should contain the minimum necessary for people who know how to answer the question to recognize that fact. Long and excessive question titles serve no purpose.
In your example, both questions are tagged [nethack] so that anyone curious about the title can immediately know the game name. Anyone familiar with Eating Corpses or Praying to God will readily identify the game and this tag will confirm it. People who know about those topics in other games can notice the lack of that game tagged. Finally, people who don't know the answer in any game, are not required for that question, but may browse it at their leisure and determine the correct game from the tag (or question content).
You're absolutely right, but the title's are so catchy on our new Stack Exchange overview page that I wouldn't want them to change!
I generally think that the question should be fully explanatory as to what's going on. Name of game, class, whatever, even to a noob, because everyone sees the questions. But those titles are hilarious without the context.
